Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 9: Line 9:
==Actors and filmmakers==
==Actors and filmmakers==
<!--New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
<!--New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Pelmear}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Francisco_Villarroel}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Francisco_Villarroel}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mika'ela_Fisher}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mika'ela_Fisher}}

Revision as of 09:30, 4 April 2025

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Actors and filmmakers. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Actors and filmmakers|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Actors and filmmakers. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Purge page cache watch
Scan for actor AfDs

Scan for filmmaker AfDs


Actors and filmmakers

Donald Pelmear (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability found. Played in notable series like Dr Who, but only a minor role. He is just a name appearing in lists of actors, but doesn't get further attention in books[1]. No news sources paid significant attention to his death[2]. General Google results are wiki's and fora, no indepth reliable sources there either[3]. Fram (talk) 09:30, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

His role in The Time Warrior is significant, not minor. Merge into a not-yet existing cast section of that serial. Thanks. (https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/sci-fi/doctor-who-guide/the-time-warrior/) -Mushy Yank. 19:06, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He played in 4 of the 26 episodes of one season of this long-running series. It's a significant role in that one story arc, it is a minor role in Doctor Who. Fram (talk) 19:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, sure, it's also less important in the universal history of fiction than Rhett Butler and Darth Vader, which in turn are less important than Odyssseus and Don Quixote, etc, but that's not really the point.... It's a significant [not minor] role in a notable production and that's why I suggest to Redirect the page there. If other significant ro|es in notable productions are identified, the Redirect can be undone and the page expanded back into a proper article. Thank you. -Mushy Yank. 19:20, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As I said before, there are people less notable than him who have an article. So, there's no reason to delete this one. Spectritus (talk) 8:54, 5 April 2025 (UTC)
Francisco Villarroel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promo for non notable filmmaker. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. No sign of any reviews for his films. Having his films screened at minor festivals and winning minor awards does not satisfy FILMMAKER. One of multiple promo pieces for Villarroel and his creations made by the same spammer. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:35, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. plicit 02:29, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mika'ela Fisher (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet notability standards per WP:GNG, and reads heavily of WP:PROMO (and likely COI editing). The article relies heavily on primary sources (the subject's own websites, IMDB entries, and self-produced promotional materials) rather than coverage from independent reliable sources per WP:GNG. Most references are to listings on festival websites, agency portfolios, and film databases, which do not constitute substantive coverage; others are of little significant coverage that fail to meet even WP:100W, therefore failing WP:SIGCOV.

It is also relevant to mention the other recent AfD's related to the subject, such as WP:Articles for deletion/Victory's Short and WP:Articles for deletion/Männin. Madeleine (talk) 00:30, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Thapaswini Poonacha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined G4. Non-notable actress. This version of the article is drastically different from the previous version which was deleted in 2022. Although it's still in very poor shape, and would need to be completely rewritten if kept. Fails WP:NACTOR. CycloneYoris talk! 21:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response to AfD Discussion: Thapaswini Poonacha
I oppose the deletion of this article on the grounds that Thapaswini Poonacha meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria for actors (WP:NACTOR) and has received significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources.
1. Notability as an Actress
Thapaswini Poonacha has been featured in multiple Kannada films, including:
Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – Available on JioCinema
Gajarama (2025) – Upcoming release on February 7, 2025
Mr. Jack – Upcoming, co-starring Guru Nandan
Rukmini Vasantha – Upcoming, co-starring Shree Mahadev
She has received media attention for her performances and won the Chittara Promising Star Award, which is a notable recognition in the Kannada film industry.
2. Significant Media Coverage
Multiple independent and reliable sources have covered her career and achievements, demonstrating significant coverage beyond passing mentions:
Times of India:
"I do my research before signing a film"
"Not about numbers, want to do memorable movies"
"Roles have to make my soul happy"
The New Indian Express:
"I have no interest in chasing attention"
Kannada Prabha:
"Thapaswini Poonacha: I have no interest in chasing attention"
Hindustan Times Kannada:
"Thapaswini Poonacha in Christmas photoshoot"
These sources demonstrate that Thapaswini Poonacha is consistently covered in reputable media, indicating her notability as an actress and public figure.
3. Business and Coffee Industry Recognition
In addition to her acting career, she is a certified coffee cup tester and runs a coffee business in Coorg. This has been discussed in interviews and media coverage, adding to her notability beyond acting.
4. Conclusion
Thapaswini Poonacha meets WP:NACTOR by virtue of:
✅ Multiple roles in notable Kannada films
✅ Award recognition (Chittara Promising Star Award)
✅ Significant, independent media coverage
✅ Additional recognition in the coffee industry
Given the multiple reliable sources and her growing career in Kannada cinema, deletion is not justified. If improvements are needed, I encourage a rewrite instead of deletion. Akashmdp (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
Agree on multiple roles in notable Kannada films, which is enough for a standalone page, but would you happen to have a source for the award, by any chance? -Mushy Yank. 17:40, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seen the Youtube video. Added it. A better source might be needed for that, but as notability does not depend on that point (but on her 2 roles), not urgent. Advising you no to repeat the same things nor add long walls of text here or on the page. -Mushy Yank. 18:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did you ask AI to ask if the article should be deleted or not? That might explain why Kannada industry became coffee industry. DareshMohan (talk) 18:06, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: 2 significant roles in (2) notable films (the second has no page yet but at least 3 bylined reviews [see page]) have her meet the requirements for WP:NACTRESS. I have cleaned up the page. -Mushy Yank. 17:20, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep – Thapaswini Poonacha meets WP:NACTRESS by having significant roles in two notable films:
    Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – Recognized and covered in mainstream Kannada media.
    Gajarama (2025) – While the film does not yet have its own Wikipedia page, it has received at least three bylined reviews from reliable sources.
    Additionally, she has been profiled in multiple independent, reliable sources, including:
    Times of India (article)
    New Indian Express (article)
    Kannada Prabha (article)
    Hindustan Times Kannada (article)
    Her acting career and coffee business have been independently covered, reinforcing her notability beyond just press releases or promotional content. The page has been cleaned up to meet Wikipedia’s neutrality and sourcing guidelines.
    Thus, per WP:GNG and WP:NACTRESS, the article should be kept. Akashmdp (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
    The Kannada Prabha piece is more interview. The Vinay Lokesh piece is also interview. These aren't nearly enough, IMHO. I don't see a single presented source which isn't routine entertainment news, mostly quotes. No direct detailing at all. To Akashmdp, repeating your bullet points over and over doesn't make your argument any stronger. You may be convinced, but you need to convince the other editors in this discussion. BusterD (talk) 18:14, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete User:Akashmdp is the page creator AND a paid contributor to this page. As for the sources already applied on the page, cite #2 (Asianet Suvarna News) admits it's a Kannada translation of The Times of India link (cite #1). Both consist entirely of identical quotes from the subject. Interviews do not count towards GNG. The two movie reviews are both (parenthetical) bare mentions, but do confirm the single role. Cite #5 is also an interview with a few bits of routine industry news. The photoshoot linked above is five pics of her in same outfit next to quotes from the actress. If this is all an avowed digital marketing professional with 7+ years of experience in the industry can bring, it's not very impressive to me. BusterD (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    For full disclosure, I was the administrator who declined the speedy deletion tag earlier. BusterD (talk) 17:59, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Meets WP:NACTRESS and WP:GNG.
    I would like to address the concerns raised by User:BusterD regarding notability and sources.
    1. Significant Roles in Multiple Notable Films
      • Hari Kathe Alla Giri Kathe (2022) – A commercially released Kannada film with media coverage.
      • Gajarama (2025) – Upcoming film, already receiving pre-release coverage.
      • Mr. Jack & Rukmini Vasantha – Both announced, with media mentions. Under WP:NACTRESS, an actor needs two significant roles in notable films, which she meets.
    2. Coverage in Reliable, Independent Sources
      • Times of India: Multiple interviews and feature stories.
      • New Indian Express: Independent reporting on her career.
      • Hindustan Times (Kannada): Coverage of her work.
      • Kannada Prabha: Career analysis and industry perspectives. Response to the Source Criticism:
      • The Times of India article is a primary source, but it is still independent and features her career insights.
      • The Asianet Suvarna News article may translate TOI but does not invalidate other sources.
      • Movie reviews confirm her roles, fulfilling minimum WP:NACTRESS requirements.
      • The New Indian Express piece is not just an interview; it provides analysis of her trajectory.
      • Photoshoot coverage, while not the strongest evidence, still indicates media attention.
    3. Regarding Paid Editing Allegations
      • While User:Akashmdp may have created the page, the subject’s notability stands independently.
      • Wikipedia has a system for COI disclosures, but that does not automatically invalidate an article’s merits.
      • Even if a paid editor initiated the page, the subject’s career must be evaluated separately from who added the content.
    4. Conclusion
      • Thapaswini Poonacha meets both WP:GNG and WP:NACTRESS based on her coverage and career milestones.
      • The article has been cleaned up to remove promotional tone and improve sourcing.
      • If further citations or refinements are needed, that can be worked on, but outright deletion is unnecessary.
    Thus, the article should be kept. Akashmdp (talk) 18:12, 3 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
    Now you're screaming. You have made your argument. Let others speak. Mushy Yank can be helpful here. Consult with them. BusterD (talk) 18:16, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 20:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Passes Wp:GNG and Wp:NACTRESS. Multiple significant roles in notable movies and multiple significant coverage in WP:RS, both are available. Zuck28 (talk) 01:34, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep: As per above discussion and my search on the subject find this: [4], [5], [6] B-Factor (talk) 12:41, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Weak Keep
    Thank you, B-Factor, for your input. The references you provided—Times of India, Cinema Express, and The New Indian Express—are credible sources that establish Thapaswini Poonacha’s notability as an actress in Kannada cinema.
    These sources provide coverage of her career, film roles, and interviews, which meet Wikipedia’s General Notability Guidelines (GNG). Additionally, her role in upcoming films like Gajarama shows ongoing relevance.
    I believe the page should be retained, but I am open to improving it by adding more citations or restructuring content for better compliance with Wikipedia standards.
    Looking forward to further discussion. Akashmdp (talk) 17:47, 4 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
    @Akashmdp Is your !vote Keep or Weak Keep? (You don't need to repeat identical arguments over and over, even if it's to thank someone -we understood your point, I guess-, which is perfectly fine, though) Inviting you to "remove" your "Weak Keep" above (with strikethrough) (So that it appears Weak Keep) if your !vote (the only thing that should be bolded (theorically :D) in a !vote) is indeed Keep. And Gajarama is NOT an upcoming film, mind you. It was released in February and has received multiple reviews in reliable media outlets, this being one of the main arguments (with her other significant role) in favour of retention of the page. -Mushy Yank. 18:53, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, thank you for your kind suggestion. Yes, I was confused. Gajarams is released. I am sorry for that. Should I update that in the page? Also, there is no option to remove keep with strike. Should I send new reply regarding that? Akashmdp (talk) 15:55, 6 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
It’s OK, done it for you. The film is clearly indicated as released in the article so there’s no problem. -Mushy Yank. 17:57, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much. If you don’t mind, can you tell me what should I do next? Is the article live? Nomination header is still there. Akashmdp (talk) 18:26, 6 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
Just be patient :D. The discussion will take place until April 9 at least. The nomination tag will remain until the discussion is closed and a consensus (to retain/delete/redirect/draftify) is clear. Nothing to do in particular here; feel free to list new sources on the talk page if you find some and think they are useful to expand the page. Best, -Mushy Yank. 18:58, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime, if you wish and can, you could upload a quality photograph of this actress if you can find one that corresponds to the guidelines explained in Wikipedia:Images. Be particularly mindful of copyright and legal issues if you can find one. Please note that the potential insertion of an image is totally unrelated to notability questions and that it will not change a thing in the current discussion. -Mushy Yank. 19:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. How long does it take to index on google? Akashmdp (talk) 08:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
From their frequent use of the phrase, it appears Akashmdp gets paid when the page indexes. This was not written by an LLM, at least. BusterD (talk) 18:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Passes WP:NACTRESS who has worked as female lead in two films that have been released. Page needs to be improved though with secondary independent reliable sources. Sources with interviews are not independent of the subject. RangersRus (talk) 15:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: at the suggestion of another editor, I ran GPTZero on User:Akashmdp's extended posts in this discussion. They each came up 100% LLM created. BusterD (talk) 18:19, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes I had used LLM to improvise my article since my english is not upto the par. So much allegations on me, I am the friend of Thapaswini, I am marketer by profession but doesn’t mean I am charging Thapaswini. I can provide any proof that she is my friend. I am solely doing this for a good will. If you insist me to add COI paid or something, I really don’t mind until it doesn’t affect our article. And I still stand on my stance that I am not being paid. In future I might write an article which will be paid I hope, that time I would definitely mention it. And this is my first article and I am still a noob. I would be expecting you people help rather than defending it. @Mushy Yank@BusterD please check this out.
    Thank you Akashmdp (talk) 06:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Example (talkcontribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed. [reply]
  • Delete - The "two" significant roles argument is good as long as there is significant coverage on the subject themself. Simply having sources verifying a role is not enough. The sourcing here is no better than it was in the first two deletion discussions (mentions, NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise unreliable). Apparently there are two other films they are involved in. Maybe when there is more coverage of them there will be more coverage of this subject. Until then, it is a case of TOOSOON. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:11, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Aside from the LLVM generated content, the views of experienced editors are split between keeping and deleting. Another week getting views of other editors is needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per above. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 14:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Guerillero Parlez Moi 11:56, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hamadoun Kassogué (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find any in-depth information about this actor. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 10:20, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Aditi Saigal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a case of Wp:TOOSOON. Just one film as acting career and one ep for that she received some press coverage. Other than that she is daughter of singer and actor parents but notability is not inherited. Fails wp:NACTOR and Wp:NMUSIC as well. Zuck28 (talk) 11:01, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  • Not all individuals featured in Forbes necessarily meet the eligibility threshold for a standalone Wikipedia article.
    The subject must first satisfy the notability criteria outlined in Wikipedia's WP:Notability guidelines as a prerequisite for inclusion.
    Zuck28 (talk) 14:23, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Notability is not established per WP:NACTOR, WP:MUSICBIO nor WP:GNG. The sourcing consists of standard PR type promo that one would see for any emerging actor with a press agent, including Forbes, which is not significant coverage, it's simply a photo of her with a caption mentioning her name, thus trivial. The Forbes "profile" link above is more standard PR written by "Forbes Staff", (it does not even have a by-line). I agree with the nom that this is a case of WP:TOOSOON. Perhaps in a few more years this emerging actor will become notable, but at this time, one acting role, Spotify "fans" and famous parents is not enough. Netherzone (talk) 15:46, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does have a byline and in my view counts as one piece of significant reliable sources coverage. Another reliable bylined piece in the Hindu here, another bylined piece here, leaning Keep for WP:GNG rather than WP:NACTOR imvAtlantic306 (talk) 20:50, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ayushi Tiwari (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:PROMO bio of a non-notable actress; roles appear to be minor roles in notable productions and if there are significant roles they are only in non-notable productions, so fails WP:NACTOR. I don't see a WP:GNG pass either; the coverage in the article and in BEFORE is limited to tabloid or unbylined coverage in WP:NEWSORGINDIA sources. May be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:26, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Mojo Hand (talk) 13:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rehaa Khann (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG Randompersonediting (✍️📚) 12:52, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: I think it's getting better but not quite there. Please add more reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 22:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. plicit 03:43, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aliia Rozа (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find anything significant in a WP:BEFORE. The sources on the current page are basically a rehash of her being on a podcast telling her story. CNMall41 (talk) 03:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. plicit 23:30, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Douglas (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Semi-advertorialized article about an actor, not properly sourced as passing WP:NACTOR. As always, actors are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they've had roles -- the notability test isn't in listing acting roles, it's in showing that they've received WP:GNG-worthy coverage and analysis about them and their performances. But the roles listed here are all minor supporting and guest roles, and the article is referenced entirely to primary sources and directory entries (which are not support for notability) rather than any evidence of GNG-building coverage about him in reliable sources. Bearcat (talk) 20:23, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. plicit 14:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Corteon Moore (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR. Awards and roles are not notable enough. Looking like more of a promotion only. Agent 007 (talk) 13:47, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Reads like a PR release. Barry Wom (talk) 13:57, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. RL0919 (talk) 16:56, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Kew (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't find sufficient sources to pass WP:GNG or WP:ENT. Suonii180 (talk) 16:31, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. RL0919 (talk) 16:58, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roshan Shrestha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

In Special:Diff/1255412434 an IP vandal partially WP:AHIJACKed this page through a change of the birth date of possibly another Roshan Shrestha, and following that, the substitution of "Gyan Bahadur Pradhan" with "ROSU".

The underlying, ostensibly single and real subject is the non-notable actor born as it may be in 1980, whose real name may be Gyan Bahadur Pradhan (no, that appears to be yet another individual, as explained below), and who started his modeling career reportedly in 2003. This subject fails WP:GNG through a lack of significant coverage, and fails WP:ANYBIO, as none of the criteria are met (the supposed awards are non-notable and the information on the awards is difficult or impossible to verify using reliable sources in the first place). The subject also fails WP:NACTOR, because the films aren't notable; two of the films are direct-to-YouTube productions:[9][10], and Hero Returns is this, possibly a less obscure but also non-notable film; I am unable to identify "Kapura". Some of the sources are about the films, not about the actor, but the films fail WP:NFILM, as the coverage is not significant, and for other reasons specific to NFILM.

I wasn't able to find anything in my WP:BEFORE search. —Alalch E. 15:51, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete My search efforts led to a similar conclusion as Alalch E.'s. There is no significant coverage of the subject or his projects that would be needed for WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. Instead of repeating all that was already said in the nomination, I'll add a few findings that may aid others in further search or prevent them from going down the rabbit holes I did, (1) the subject is distinct from the photographer Rohan Shreshta; (2) he is also distinct from "Gyan Bahadur Pradhan", aka Roshan, who produced the film Yo Man Ta Mero Nepali Ho to be released July 2025, in which the subject is an actor; (3) in his Facebook page the subject mainly talks about himself as a choreographer, rather than actor or model. Abecedare (talk) 17:07, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    So this page has at various times (and during a period of time concurrently) included information about four individuals: (1) Roshan Shrestha, actor; (2) Gyan Bahadur Pradhan, aka Roshan, producer; (3) Rohan Shrestha, photographer; (4) the ostensible "born in 2004" entity about whom we can suspect is a younger individual named Roshan Shrestha who hijacked the page. —Alalch E. 17:33, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I hope we get some input from editors who can read the language of most of the sources (Nepali?) to sort this out. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:17, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I hope we can get some feedback from Endrabcwizart who is the experienced editor who created this article. As they live in Nepal, I'm sure they can help with the sources since the likely located most of them and they could help us sort through what has happened with this article over the past year. Liz Read! Talk! 19:17, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • contribute - Recently, I received a notification that I was mentioned here for a meaningful contribution. I try to give my best. I am the creator of this article, but I am not participating in the discussion regarding keeping, deleting, or any other actions.
Whenever I create an article, I review multiple references beforehand. Since I live in Nepal, I have access to information beyond mainstream news, such as insights from social media and various interviews— additional details for me that may not be part of this discussion.
When I originally created this article, there were sufficient reliable sources. However, there has been a massive change since then. I was unaware of these changes, but if I had noticed them, I would have requested a "protection lock" for a certain period to prevent alterations.
If we evaluate the current article, it seems to be heading toward "speedy deletion," which was shocking for me when I saw such significant modifications. At this point, :I request a review of the article's history, as it may be helpful. I will continue contributing if the article is restored or draft
In Nepal, English newspapers are growing, but over 90% of media coverage is in Nepali. I understand that this creates challenges for participation and contribution. While various tools are available, they can be time-consuming. Below, I have provided some reputable and well-covered references that may be helpful for the discussion.
for google search Nepali Keyword " ज्ञानबहादुर प्रधान (रोशन) " or "ज्ञानबहादुर प्रधान" or " रोशन श्रेष्ठ (low search resault) "
I sincerely thank all contributors for their efforts here. Endrabcwizart (talk) 19:49, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comment. This is the content that you created (with some lesser incremental and maintenance edits by other editors) before any significant changes were made to the content: Special:PermanentLink/1237024129. What you published starts with: Roshan Shrestha (Nepali : रोशन श्रेष्ठ) also known as Gyan Bahadur Pradhan ... However, Gyan Bahadur Pradhan, aka Roshan is not Roshan Shrestha. So there was a mixing of subjects from the beginning. A lot of the content is not verifiable according to WP:BLP standards (obvious lack of citations next to statements). The sources in the linked revision do not show that the topic is notable. The three new sources which you provided also do not show that the topic is notable. —Alalch E. 23:38, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wayne Keeley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Created by a WP:SPA in 2009. The creator contributed the bulk (62%) of the edits to the article and has not edited since the article was created. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Lacks significant coverage with few cites to reliable, independent sources. Reads like a resume and is little more than a promotional accomplishments listing designed to sell or "puff piece." Many unsourced statements. Geoff | Who, me? 17:07, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Lance Kramer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced biography from 2006. Could not find SIGCOV about him. Natg 19 (talk) 23:02, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't think it is the same person. IMDB (not RS, I know) has several Lance Kramers: [12][13] Natg 19 (talk) 01:37, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't follow WP:GNG and the lack of sources seems like grounds for deletion. Cottagechez (talk) 00:03, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: I'm yet undecided. He directed a number of episodes, so there should be sources. Most of the article was written by IP editors, but I reached out to Jdb00. Bearian (talk) 00:08, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep He meets WP:CREATIVE#3, as having played a major role (directing) in the creation of a notable work The Simpsons, which has been the subject of multiple, independent reviews. I have found one article about him, from 2000, and several reviews of two short animated films of his shown in animation festivals in the early 1990s. Otherwise, I have found sources that confirm his role as director in the episodes of the Simpsons. I think that is enough to satisfy WP:CREATIVE#3, as they provide verification of his role. (This person is not the same as the Lance Kramer who with his brother Brandon Kramer has made The First Step and Holding Liat - that Lance Kramer will probably be notable too.) RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:42, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that he means CREATIVE#3 as Kramer is not the "creator" of the Simpsons - that would be Matt Groening. And CREATIVE#3 mentions (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series). However, the 3 articles mentioned may meet WP:BASIC. Can you put links to the articles here? Natg 19 (talk) 21:33, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CREATIVE includes WP:DIRECTOR and other creative professions - it does not mean just the original creator of a series. The wording you quote is about what form coverage of "the significant or well-known work or collective body of work" can take: the work "must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work, for example ...". Lance Kramer directed 25 episodes of The Simpsons - it seems to me that he "played a major role in co-creating" it. The sources are in the article. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:25, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I still disagree with you, as directing 25 episodes is very minor, out of the 783 (and growing) number of The Simpsons episodes. That is less than 5%. Will review the sources later on. Natg 19 (talk) 18:33, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:07, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reminder that we don't much care about the sourcing in the article, so much as we care about the total possible sourcing available.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Liz Read! Talk! 23:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BAFTA Award for Best Animation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Content split from BAFTA Award for Best Animated Film. It seems the category was discontinued in the early 80s and re-introduced in the 00's (as can be seen here. This is not a valid rationale for splitting out content. It is the same category, and the content should be kept together so that readers have all of the information in the same place. If the article needed to be split out for size reasons (which wasn't the case here) it was important that the article split did not create the false impression they were seperate categories. The split-off version is superfluous in any case now because I have reverted the split on the parent article. Betty Logan (talk) 17:07, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I've finished editing the article BAFTA Award for Best Animated Film to reflect the changes that were made at BAFTA Award for Best Animation (table year numbering, etc). So I think BAFTA Award for Best Animation can now be safely deleted. Nick RTalk 14:05, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Would editors arguing for a Deletion be open to a Redirection or even a selective Merge? To what target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The article relies heavily on primary BAFTA sources but lacks substantial independent academic references that establish its standalone importance.Krishnpriya123 (talk) 17:10, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and/or redirect. (No strong preference.) We don't need separate articles just because the name of the category may have changed — if the function of the category remained consistent, then we just need one article that covers both phases of its history at its current name. Since the same information is already reflected in the existing article anyway (and already was, it just hadn't been converted to table format yet), we don't need this to be forked out just because of a name change. Bearcat (talk) 23:29, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Owen× 10:03, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sesha Sindhu Rao (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

possibly an advertisement...almost all sources are unreliable..they did cite sources from The Times of India and The Hindu but that doesn't necessarily indicate significance. - AwfulReader(talk) 07:19, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.
Added as many sources from youtube interviews on local Telugu news channels such as idream Media and NTV as possible. As the subject is an up and coming director, the citations are mostly from local news channels. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 07:23, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.amazon.com/prime-video/actor/Sesha-Sindhu-Rao/amzn1.dv.gti.dcd0065f-a6a0-4659-8012-46280ec9766a/
Sindhu is also listed as a director on Prime Video and is a person of significance. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 07:47, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sindhu has been a person of significance in the industry since before she became a director as well. Featured here in this article from 2017 https://www.deccanchronicle.com/entertainment/tollywood/220817/women-in-the-mens-world.html Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 09:49, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chakrabartyprateek14, Do you know her personally? Zuck28 (talk) 10:22, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chakrabartyprateek14 there's a lot of information about her personal life and career, which is not easily verifiable with the given citations.
also you uploaded a copyrighted image of her, which was uploaded on IMDb already without any photographers name or copyright information. But you mentioned the name of the photographer as well. How do you know all of this? Zuck28 (talk) 10:28, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This information and anecdotes were shared with me by the subject herself. Most of which I tried to include citations for.
While uploading the picture.. I asked the subject for the photographer's name and credentials. And the photographer waived off any rights that may raise any copyright issues. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 10:37, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The photo you uploaded is missing the permissions from the copyright holder and the information you asked from the subject directly is not supposed to be on Wikipedia without any reference. Most likely it appears to be a case of COI or UPE.
But I will leave this matter into the hands of some other experienced editor or admin.
Zuck28 (talk) 12:07, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do COI or UPE mean? If it helps, whatever is un-cited/un-referenced, can be toned down or taken off.
Please do suggest. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 20:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wp:COI & wp:UPE Zuck28 (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for these.
I'll add appropriate tags for COI.
If you can help with editing or trimming down content where you see necessary, it would be helpful. Chakrabartyprateek14 (talk) 06:07, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 13:04, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was ‎Keep. Eluchil404 (talk) 22:44, 7 April 2025 (UTC)(non-admin closure)[reply]

Royce Cronin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unreferenced article about an actor. As always, actors are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on third-party media coverage about them and their performances -- but this cites no references at all, and is written in a semi-advertorialized tone that's not complying with WP:NPOV.
As he's a British actor whose strongest claims to potentially passing NACTOR are television roles from 20 years ago, I'm willing to withdraw this if a British editor with better access to archived UK media coverage from the noughts can find enough GNG-worthy sourcing to salvage it, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have any referencing. Bearcat (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete found nothing in my search that'd contribute towards GNG. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete have yet to find independent RS referencing the subject in detail asides from brief mentions of his roles from what I have found so far.Villkomoses (talk) 17:15, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep He meets WP:NACTOR with significant roles in 24Seven, Family Affairs and more recently on stage in The Band Back Together, a stage play by Barney Norris which does not yet have a WP article, but has reviews from The Guardian, The Times and The Spectator, which I have added to this article, and is thus clearly notable. He has also had other stage roles, including in a well-reviewed production of Bouncers by John Godber (which also should have a WP article). RebeccaGreen (talk) 17:55, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - per WP:NACTOR - Had two regular roles on main channels in the UK. I have expanded the article slightly. Thank you for explaining RebeccaGreen - I was able to find sources for the works you talked about using the newspaper archive. Perhaps this just needs extra research, a lot of his career was in the 1990s and early 2000s and the link rot obviously means we lost sources for his early roles. I have sourced some early role info using archives.Rain the 1 21:20, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I would request that this stays open longer since the original rationale and subsequent support for deletion is based on an unsourced version of this article [16] - I have sourced more of the actor's early life and career beginnings since my previous comment. Also pinging @Alexeyevitch:@DerbyCountyinNZ:@Villkomoses:@Traumnovelle:@Bearcat: - should I continue trying to expand it?Rain the 1 22:00, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per sources provided by RebeccaGreen and the improvement (WP:HEY) done by RainTheOne. The subject is clearly notable and meets NACTOR. There are also multiple newspaper sources discussing the actor that I can email. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 18:22, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.